An Examination of Recidivism Outcomes for Individuals in a Novel Prosecutor-Led Gun Diversion Program

Background and Purpose: Gun violence is an urgent and persistent public health issue in the U.S. Within the criminal legal system, incarceration-based responses to illegal gun possession are familiar, yet ineffective at preventing recidivism or ensuring safety, and illegal gun possession is one of the most racially disparate offense categories. There is an urgent need for the criminal legal system to develop more responsive approaches to a range of gun-related offenses that better address the public health crisis of gun violence and the racialized criminalization of gun possession. In recent years, a handful of prosecutor’s offices have developed prosecutor-led gun diversion programs (PLGDPs), which aim to provide violence-reduction interventions and an opportunity to avoid the consequences of a criminal conviction. This presentation focuses on a PLGDP in Minneapolis, Minnesota and examines recidivism outcomes, with a focus on illegal gun possession and charges involving interpersonal violence.

Methods: The Pathway PLGDP, launched in 2017, aims to reduce recidivism and violence through community-based interventions with individuals charged with illegal gun possession. Data from 76 Pathway participants and 93 individuals from a comparison group (those who would have been eligible for the Pathway program in the two years prior to its implementation) were included. For both groups, we examined charges and convictions taking place within a two-year period following the relevant weapons-related offense. Descriptive statistics were generated for both groups, and we examined rates of recidivism with multivariate logistic regression, controlling for age, race, gender, and having prior criminal charges.

Results: The majority of both Pathway and comparison group identified as Black and male. The average age of Pathways participants (24.67 years) was significantly younger than the comparison group (28.30 years), and individuals in the comparison group (73%) were more likely to have a prior charge compared to Pathway participants (52.6%). Pathway participants had fewer charges (42.1%) and convictions (25%) in the two years after their weapons charge compared to those in the comparison group (51.6% charged and 41% convicted). In the adjusted multivariate regression models, Pathway participants had significantly lower odds of conviction than those in the comparison group (aOR = 0.455, p<.05). Pathway graduates had significantly lower odds of charges (aOR = 0.293, p<.01) and convictions (aOR = 0.216, p<.05) than those in the comparison group. Pathway graduates had significantly lower odds of violent or weapons-related offenses than those in the comparison group (aOR = 0.279, p<.05). Those who were terminated from the Pathway program had significantly higher odds of violent or weapons-related offenses than those in the comparison group (aOR = 3.445, p<.05).

Conclusions and Implications: As a whole, Pathway participants had lower rates of general and “violent” charges, which suggests that the implementation of the program did not negatively impact public safety. Nearly 70% of Pathway participants graduated, and graduates demonstrate substantially lower rates of reoffending, indicating the effectiveness of Pathway programming. Limitations will be discussed, as well as future research on PLGDPs as part of a continuum of decarceration approaches.